First, and as initially reported by Mike Garafolo of USA Today, Sherman claims that he drank from the water bottle of a teammate that had been spiked with Adderall. The teammate has both a prescription and a therapeutic use exemption, allowing the teammate to ingest Adderall, which contains amphetamines.

Sherman has denied that account in text messages sent to Curtis Crabtree of KJR, who works part-time for PFT. However, we’ve confirmed Garafolo’s account.

Second, Sherman believes there were flaws in the method of obtaining his urine for testing.

It’s unknown whether both arguments will actually be advanced at the hearing. Given that the two contentions are somewhat inconsistent (i.e., “I accidentally ingested it” and “the testing methodology generated a false positive”), Sherman would be wise to pick a horse.

The problem is that both horses likely will lose. As to the water-bottle excuse, it won’t matter. Players are responsible for anything that is in their systems. As to the attack on the collection process, the problem is that the procedures for pursuing appeals allow the NFL to refuse to provide most of the evidence that would help the player establish irregularities.

As the source explained, these cases are lost not in the hearing room; they were lost at the negotiating table. Unless and until the league and the union agree to testing procedures that require the NFL to prove with a high degree of certainty the accuracy of the collection and testing of a sample that, if positive, will result in a suspension, players will be at risk of being wrongly suspended.

Sherman has every right to do as he pleases. The NFL has laid out a culture of zero loyalty w/non-guarenteed contracts. His commitment is to himself. This could effect a mans future earnings and marketability.

The testing protocol thing is in my opinion a very serious issue. I think if he pushes that hard, he might actually get somewhere, in that the league certainly has the responsibility to the players to use best practices when dealing with tests, b samples and the like. I could see the players union interceding on his behalf if he believes his initial positive was in error and his b sample was mis handled or lost.

Just one more way for the NFL to make sure only the money teams advance in the playoffs. The refs work to advance the money teams. The NFL picks on the Seahawks during training camp to make an example of the no contact rules. Now this. Of all the players in the NFL they could choose to go after, they choose our two pro bowlers to gut us right before the playoffs. And they don't even have to prove what they say is true.

What crap.

Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

Cartire wrote:I have a serious question. Why is Adderal considered a PED? Why is it even tested for? Why does it matter to anyone if the player takes adderal?

It enhances focus and concentration. It may also allow for higher athletic output for short periods of time.

(It's also addictive and has bad side effects, like all amphetamines, so dangerous to the player.)

So then what your saying is it gives you an unfair advantage on the field. So wouldnt players with prescriptions be given an unfair advantage? And being that these organizations can procure plenty of medical staff to prescribe medications, why wouldnt teams just give prescriptions to every player that wanted it?

hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??

SalishHawkFan wrote:Just one more way for the NFL to make sure only the money teams advance in the playoffs. The refs work to advance the money teams. The NFL picks on the Seahawks during training camp to make an example of the no contact rules. Now this. Of all the players in the NFL they could choose to go after, they choose our two pro bowlers to gut us right before the playoffs. And they don't even have to prove what they say is true.

What crap.

I don't buy this. There are more players being accused of violating the drug policy than just BB and Sherm, and some are on "money teams". Here's the list so far:

SalishHawkFan wrote:Just one more way for the NFL to make sure only the money teams advance in the playoffs. The refs work to advance the money teams. The NFL picks on the Seahawks during training camp to make an example of the no contact rules. Now this. Of all the players in the NFL they could choose to go after, they choose our two pro bowlers to gut us right before the playoffs. And they don't even have to prove what they say is true.

What crap.

I don't buy this. There are more players being accused of violating the drug policy than just BB and Sherm, and some are on "money teams". Here's the list so far:

SalishHawkFan wrote:Just one more way for the NFL to make sure only the money teams advance in the playoffs. The refs work to advance the money teams. The NFL picks on the Seahawks during training camp to make an example of the no contact rules. Now this. Of all the players in the NFL they could choose to go after, they choose our two pro bowlers to gut us right before the playoffs. And they don't even have to prove what they say is true.

What crap.

I don't buy this. There are more players being accused of violating the drug policy than just BB and Sherm, and some are on "money teams". Here's the list so far:

Cartire wrote:I have a serious question. Why is Adderal considered a PED? Why is it even tested for? Why does it matter to anyone if the player takes adderal?

It enhances focus and concentration. It may also allow for higher athletic output for short periods of time.

(It's also addictive and has bad side effects, like all amphetamines, so dangerous to the player.)

So then what your saying is it gives you an unfair advantage on the field. So wouldnt players with prescriptions be given an unfair advantage? And being that these organizations can procure plenty of medical staff to prescribe medications, why wouldnt teams just give prescriptions to every player that wanted it?

Prescriptions are irrelevant. You can't take it even with a prescription without first applying with the NFL for an exemption which takes into account medical history and whatnot. It's a rigorous process and very few get the exemptions.

The above list omits the name of S- Winston Guy, Seahawks who was also suspended for adderall.

Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to completely take the final step. That was done and the final step was taken. The OLine still needs work.

Sherman needs to pick one of those lame excuses, and stick with it......cause the two excuses combined don't work. You can't say I drank out of a teammates drink, then at the same time say the testing system is flawed.

Either way, neither excuse will hold any water I don't think. Unless Sherman and his agent provide evidence that indeed the testing system is flawed.

With Sherman's personality, I was hopeful he had been on the stuff for years, and that would be the basis for his (winning) appeal. Now? Pretty clear he's going down. Drinking from another player's water bottle? C'mon bro. Grade schoolers fabricate better excuses. I agree with the previous posters requesting he start his suspension immediately. One poster chimed in that we may not make the POs without he and Browner, but it really don't matter one way or the other. I'll take our chances of winning our home games without them. Even should we lose in Toronto, we still may make the POs and they will then be available (a scenario where we will most likely be on the road and their presense will be crucial).

This is all gamesmanship, folks... the Seahawks are simply trying to avoid playing four games without both Sherman and Browner. Browner is serving his suspension now in order to be back for the first game of the playoffs. Sherman made a B.S. appeal that he knows will get rejected just to buy some time, play in a few games now, and come back if we go deep in the playoffs. The problem is that it's looking like both Sherman and Browner will be missing for the home game against SF. They'd be missing that game anyway if they had both took their 4-game suspensions immediately or this week, but both (instead of just Browner) would be back for the playoffs. Why didn't they just do that?